Yes, in a lot of ways Rosalie reminds me of Scarlett O'Hara. Althought Rosalie and Scarlett desire different things, they both desire them because of an ideal that they've got in their heads, and the selfish belief that they deserve to have that ideal, regardless of any circumstances in the world they live in. Try and get in the way of that ideal and they turn into monsters, ready to kill for what they want, if they have to.

Jazz Girl ~ I think Nessie is proof that human-Rosalie would have been a great mother. Her shallowness is at an all-time high in her vampire state and she manages to effortlessly love and dote on her spotlight-steeling-niece. How much more with her own child or children? Children have a way of humbling loving parents who once were or are self-centered. Also, Rosalie was not the only one protecting Nessie while in the womb, Esme and Bella were too. Just curious, what do you think extremely-nurturing Esme’s motivations were for protecting Nessie while in Bella’s womb? I believe they were ALL fighting for the sanctity of an unborn life in their own respective ways.

I like when Rosalie says, “But there will never be more than the two of us. And I’ll never sit on a porch somewhere, with him gray-haired by my side, surrounded by our grandchildren.” I don’t know if you watch reality shows, but I’ve seen a few where wealthy people have cooks, maids and other hired help, and the parents absolutely adore their children and are devoted to them, though they are sometimes very shallow about their appearances and other areas. As the cute song from Faith Hill says, “A baby changes everything”. I just don’t see why human-Rosalie, whether rich or poor, could not be happy or ecstatic as a human mother, regardless of her character weaknesses.
********************************************************************************************************************************************************

corona

corona wrote:VS, After reading your other comments, I have to say you convinced me, Rosalie is a "Jacob girl". Much of what you said mirrored the arguments for Bella choosing Jacob. Ironic, isn't it?

[**giggles**] To answer your question, YES very much so.

corona wrote: I get your point, though. Assuming that Rosalie literally means it when she says she wishes someone had voted NO for her, even with Emmett sitting right there beside her, then she would rather be in the grave than living the life she has with Emmett. And she does repeat that view in EC. If so, then all other considerations are moot.

Exactly. Though, you do bring up very good points that I want to respond to.

corona wrote: Emmett's view of Rosalie isn't going to be the view of other human men necessarily. She was incredibly lucky in that regard. I fear she may end up in a loveless marriage. I'm not saying another Royce, but what kind of men is she going to attract?

Okay, I am trying to understand why you doubt Rosalie could get another loving husband. I’ve seen plenty of beautiful, high-maintenance, self-absorbed women in real life (lower-middle-class level) and on TV(extremely upper-class level), who have a loving husband who never gets tired of doting and catering to their every whim. I don’t see Rosalie having a problem loving and being involved with someone like that at all. Men have these kinds of women all the time.

Regarding Rosalie and Redemption:
I don’t see Rosalie's or Esme’s, for that matter, desires to be mothers as a means of wanting to acquire redemption. Many (though not all) women desperately desire to be mothers, especially the ones that have difficulty becoming one. I thought Rosalie's and Esme's desire for motherhood was natural, though probably intensified, and not created, by their vampire state. Which always explained, for me anyway, Sasha’s behavior in creating her immortal child.

Tornado If I may, keeping in mind we are discussing Esme’s and Rosalie’s motherhood perspective, I would like to begin by making the following 3 points first:
From a human perspective there is nothing wrong with wanting to adopt babies and there is nothing wrong with wanting to adopt preteens and teenagers. In addition, there is nothing wrong with preferring one or the other more. I feel the same applies to the vampires and more so because their feelings were intensified due to their vampire change. A good example of this as I mentioned earlier in this post, is Sasha and her immortal child. Further, IMO, it is not wrong to NOT want to settle for either one. It’s just a matter of preference.

Secondly, regarding being a mother of human-children verses a mother of vampire-preteens and teenagers long term:
I kindly and respectfully say, there are plenty of mothers who would rather have one day or one year with their infant child, whether adopted or not, than no days at all. IMO, they wouldn’t trade the opportunity for the world. Also, from what Rosalie says in EC she seems like she would have enjoyed being surrounded by her and Emmett's grandkids immensely. Which is another sweetener to the already sweet deal that motherhood could be, even with its’ stressful and strenuous long hours.

Lastly, regarding Carlisle and Esme being parents:
Esme was fortunate that her husband was capable of siring. Subsequently, giving her the opportunity of becoming a mother to young adults. When Rosalie is giving advice to Bella to drop Edward and remain human, at this point of the story, Rosalie does not have and IMO, will not ever have, what Esme has even if she wanted it. Though, IMO, that is NOT what Rosalie wants anyway.

However, let’s say she did want what Esme has, Emmett is nowhere near being capable of siring anyone and Rosalie lost it at the sight and smell of Bella’s blood while delivering the child she so desperately was protecting. Even if she wanted to adopt vampire preteens or teenagers that’s an option not available to her the conventional vampire way and probably for centuries, if at all.

Further, even if Carlisle agreed to sire someone so Rosalie could be his/her mother, the individual may prefer Carlisle and Esme be the parents and not Rosalie and Emmett or the individual may prefer not to have parents at all. And that’s if Carlisle consents to:
1.siring a non-consenting dying human again;
2. for the sole purpose of giving Rosalie motherhood and
3. possibly having to sire another non-consenting dying individual to be the mate of Rosalie’s teenage child. And so on and so on.

Furthermore, I know the individual could be fortunate enough to find a yellow-eyed mate (which would be a first, though not impossible) or convince a red-eyed vampire to convert, like Garret. But, IMO, I just don’t think Rosalie, who believes the grave is better than a somewhat-happy vampire life, would want this for her child especially, being that there is, IMO, NO motherhood-vampire-bond strong enough to make the individual content about their vampire life. Mopey Rosalie and Edward, (Edward, who looks up to Carlisle reverently), are examples for me that such a bond does NOT exist. [EDIT: I mean, the parent/child-vampire-bond ALONE strong enough to make a yellow-eyed vampire content does not exist.] Edward's and Rosalie's mates had alot to do with their contentment as vampires.

Yes, but that doesn't mean that she couldn't take under her wing some vampires who had already been turned, like Alice and Jasper. I think the problem with that would be related to Rosalie's own character because, as Jazz Girl pointed out, motherhood requires some degree of nurture at the expense of self, and I don't think Rosalie's capable of doing that. She didn't have it when she was human, either, and as Jazz Girl said, considering the shallow life she was about to start leading, even if she hadn't been beaten to death by the man she was engaged to and had lived on, I think it's unlikely she would ever have learned to see beyond the shallow ideal she had planned for herself.

It is an interesting question: was Rosalie capable of growing beyond that shallow state if she'd stayed human? I don't know. I think only SM knows for sure. It's interesting to speculate, though, because even though change is rare for a vampire, it's clear change can happen to them. But I can't see Rosalie ever changing, in spite of the stellar examples of parenthood (Carlisle and Esme) that are before her.

NO motherhood-vampire-bond strong enough to make the individual content about their vampire life. Mopey Rosalie and Edward, (Edward, who looks up to Carlisle reverently), are examples for me that such a bond does NOT exist. Edward's and Rosalie's mates had alot to do with their contentment as vampires.

I disagree. MS shows clearly that Edward appreciates the mothering he receives from Esme and father-example he receives from Carlisle. That he (or Rosalie) is discontented is not related to his inability to accept and appreciate parenting from Carlisle and Esme. Such a point of view would suggest that any child who was discontented for any reason was an example of failure in parenting. Does a discontented child really mean that they haven't bonded with their parents?

Tornado wrote:Yes, but that doesn't mean that she couldn't take under her wing some vampires who had already been turned, like Alice and Jasper.

It does if she prefers to mother children from infancy. Mothering young adults and mothering children from infancy are two very different experiences. Some people, like Esme, are okay with substituting one for the other, though all the while missing the experience of the other, and some people, like Rosalie, are not okay with substituting. I don’t see why NOT substituting or substituting is better, or worse, than the other, regardless of character strengths and weaknesses. Like I said, it’s just a matter of preference.

Regarding mothering while being shallow:
As I said before, wealthy shallow women sometimes make great mothers too and sometimes they don’t. Just like very giving mothers sometimes make great mothers and sometimes they don’t.

Tornado wrote:I disagree. MS shows clearly that Edward appreciates the mothering he receives from Esme and father-example he receives from Carlisle. That he (or Rosalie) is discontented is not related to his inability to accept and appreciate parenting from Carlisle and Esme. Such a point of view would suggest that any child who was discontented for any reason was an example of failure in parenting. Does a discontented child really mean that they haven't bonded with their parents?

Yes, as I said before, I too DON’T negate that the parent/child-vampire-bond is present in Carlisle, Esme, Edward and Rosalie and the rest of them. The point I am making is, the parent/child-vampire-bond ALONE is NOT strong enough for them to be content with living with the ever present painful and repulsive condition as yellow-eyed vampires do. It is not just simply a matter of being discontented at the lifestyle one’s parents choose for oneself. Which by the way, one can choose to stop following as soon as one gets out of the house.

PS I’ve gone back to edit the second to last sentence in my previous post.

Jazz Girl, I generally agree with your assessment of Rose. This is why I think her choice of husband would be so critical, she really needs assistance with her personal growth. She does not adapt well at all, something that sets herself apart from the rest of the Cullens. Her self-absorption requires people to conform to her. And Royce did give her everything she wanted, until he didn't. Would she fall into the same trap again? Sadly, I think so.

Jazz Girl wrote:And, even after Ness is born, she uses Ness' affection almost as a weapon, particularly against the mongrel. She's willing to share with the rest of the family, well aware of her position as aunt rather than mother. But what choice does she have?

This is what obscures her "redemption". We don't really know what has changed with Rosalie, or if anything has changed, other than she is happier with Nessie in the world and offers Bella more respect. How much of that deference to Bella was due to using it as a weapon against Jacob is unknown.

I've always seen the distinct possibility that Rose may develop a resentment towards Bella over her status as mother. Nothing would please me more than to see Rose fully accepting Bella's role, deferring to it, not challenging it, and being happy that she has what she has. That would be growth. That would be huge for Rosalie. And because it is huge, I can't say it would happen, I have to wait for SM to show that.

Jazz Girl wrote:She was fighting for her little fantasy, completely ignoring the messy and painful reality of bringing that new life into the world because she didn't have to do it.

Exactly. I don't see Rosalie as being the ally there, she is the tool that Bella uses to bring her pregnancy to full term. Rosalie isn't prepared for the actual delivery. There's that "tunnel vision" thing again. My take on the delivery isn't that Jacob kicks her out of the room, it's Stephenie. Your job is done, and you aren't worthy to stay any longer. The scene changes and becomes one of saving Bella's life, and only those who love her can stay. Rosalie returns to collect the baby, then leaves.

Jazz Girl wrote:Honestly, one of the people I've always felt the most sympathy for in the entire Saga is Emmett. I want to believe she's just a completely different person behind closed doors.

There are a few times in the story where SM seems to try to give Emmett a little more depth, but I think she said somewhere once that Emmett eventually became a stock character. In some ways I couldn't really reconcile Rosalie's character, her explanation for her NO vote is really a slap at everybody, but especially to Emmett and Carlisle. Her husband is sitting right there. Now, try to get into Emmett's mind and see how he can be reconciled with what Rosalie says. He let's it slide right off his shoulders and is exuberant that Bella wants to join the family.

If I feel like being charitable about Emmett, and I do, then I'd say he is a lot smarter than normally given credit for. He knows damn well Rosalie is never going to become human. He also knows that he is the one that makes this life bearable for Rosalie, for which she is grateful and willing to show her gratitude...behind closed doors. He is always going to be 19 after all. Some men like being the one that is able to make the cat purr, as long as her claws aren't being sharpened on them.

I know that makes him seem shallow as well, so how about this? I'd say he is perfectly aware of Rosalie's quirks, that when something is pushing her buttons that all she can think about is that. He doesn't let the implications of Rosalie's vote bother him, because he doesn't believe she is truly aware of those implications in that moment. Rosalie isn't always living in a world of regret, it's only when the subject comes up that Rosalie feels so strongly it becomes all consuming, in that moment, but it doesn't last.

"It will take an amazing amount of control,” she mused. “More even than Carlisle has. He may be just strong enough…the only thing he’s not strong enough to do is stay away from her. That’s a lost cause.”

Violet Sunlight wrote:It does if she prefers to mother children from infancy. Mothering young adults and mothering children from infancy are two very different experiences. Some people, like Esme, are okay with substituting one for the other, though all the while missing the experience of the other, and some people, like Rosalie, are not okay with substituting. I don’t see why NOT substituting or substituting is better, or worse, than the other, regardless of character strengths and weaknesses. Like I said, it’s just a matter of preference.

Yes, but as Jazz Girl pointed out, Rosalie's own attitude makes it difficult to imagine her being a good mother to anyone. It's not motherhood itself she craves, it's the ideal. Anyone who is a parent will eventually become the parent of an adult, whether they like it or not. Yes, she might like to start when they are babies, but I believe if Rosalie's attitude was a mothering one, she could find fulfillment in that role in a position similar to Esme's, but that's not what it's about for her.

Violet Sunlight wrote:es, as I said before, I too DON’T negate that the parent/child-vampire-bond is present in Carlisle, Esme, Edward and Rosalie and the rest of them. The point I am making is, the parent/child-vampire-bond ALONE is NOT strong enough for them to be content with living with the ever present painful and repulsive condition as yellow-eyed vampires do. It is not just simply a matter of being discontented at the lifestyle one’s parents choose for oneself. Which by the way, one can choose to stop following as soon as one gets out of the house.

Just because Edward and Rosalie show some discontent in their lives (and I'd point out here that Rosalie shows discontent even while she has the love of Emmett) doesn't mean it is representative of everyone in the vampire state. It depends on personality, not just that they are vampires. Emmett is a classic example. I believe that, had he been turned by someone else, and had never met Rosalie or fallen in love, he would have probably learned to be content with what he was because that's in his nature. Everyone reacts differently. You can't say that every vampire in existence would not find contentment with a parent-type role model simply because two of the vampires we are acquainted with are discontented with their lives. In fact, there's only one that could conform to your standard, and that's Edward, because, as I said before, Rosalie is not content even with Emmett. And even with Edward, your argument might hold water if he was clearly not happy with Carlisle and Esme as parents, but he is. He just craves a purpose and direction in his life.

Violet Sunlight~ There is no way you can take Ness as proof of the way anything might translate in the human world. First and foremost, Ness is NOT a typical newborn. Ness is an especially gifted hybrid infant who is already amazingly advanced and can respond to reason and request. Trying to compare how Rosalie behaves with Ness as the vampire aunt who has a secondary role in Ness’ life and never tires, needs sleep or has to worry about how exhaustion effects how she looks or functions to how she might behave as a human mother solely responsible for all care of a typical human newborn is folly. There really is honestly no way to compare the two. Aside from that, she is also a product of a large family group. Yes, Rose has a role in that family unit and functions well as the doting aunt. But, Ness is her parents’ child, not her aunt’s.

As I said, Rose really has no choice in how she works within that family structure. Truth be told, Bella screwed up Rose’s plan by surviving the birth and transformation. Again, we know this to be true. So, she takes the next best thing. She gets to play the doting aunt, with all of the benefits and none of the sacrifices. I dare say it worked out better for her than it really should have. And that, to me, is the answer to your question, “How much more with her own child or children?” Being a mother requires sacrifice, compromise, patience and, above all else, putting yourself absolutely last on your list of priorities. Rosalie really possesses none of those characteristics, neither as a human, nor a vampire. Is it possible that, as a human, her perspective could have changed when she found out she was pregnant? Sure. Anything is possible. But, given how ingrained Rosalie’s selfishness and vanity were in her even as a human, and given the fact that the people she surrounded herself with prized exactly those characteristics in her and were unlikely to help her change her ways... Well, I don’t think it was likely. I don’t say that because she was rich. Remember, her family was, in fact, middle class. She was marrying in to wealth. No, I say it because of who Rosalie was, how she viewed and treated others.

As for Esme’s motivation for her stand, I believe it had much more to do with Bella than with Ness. I think Esme understood the risk of what Ness could possibly be, just as they all did. But, she understood why Bella was willing to take the risk. She understood the fierce love a mother can have for her child and thus was willing to stand with Bella in her choice to take the chance. But, Esme also loved Bella in a way that Rosalie never could or would, and knew the reality of how Edward would react if Bella died. I believe that had Bella’s stand been different, if her choice had been different, Esme would have sided with Bella without incident. Rosalie never would have. I comment further on this below in my post to Corona.

As far as your points about Esme and Carlisle as parents, remember, Carlisle changed Edward before he changed Esme. By all rights and logic, Edward should be more of a brother to Esme than a son. And, he changed neither Jazz nor Alice. They sought out the family on their own. Esme's opportunity to mother wasn't given to her by Carlisle. Just as the look to Carlisle for guidance and leadership as a father because of who he is, they look to Esme as a mother because of who she is; her nuturing presence and ever-accepting love. I've always seen her as motherhood personified. That is not something you can say about Rosalie.

Finally, I have to completely agree wit Tornado's point about one's content or discontent with their vampire state having little if anything to do with their parental bond. Looking at Edward or Rosalie as an example of this is just not possible. Their realities, their personalities and a whole host of other dynamics are what go into determining their state of content or discontent with what they are. The Denali's are another good example of this, though from the other side of the argument. All three sisters seem perfectly content with their lives as vampires, but we know that their vampire-mother relationship ended tragically and with great drama.

Corona~ I have to say that we can’t honestly say that she offers Bella more respect or defers to her, really. We just don’t see enough going on to judge for sure. Bella & Edward are completely preoccupied with the situation with the imprint, the question of Ness’ growth and then the Volturi. We don’t really see any interactions between the two where Rosalie has to defer to Bella or overtly respects Bella. Again, Rosalie is a thorn for me and I have a very difficult time believing she changes her ways. I’m inclined to agree with you in that I honestly see her more resenting Bella’s HEA versus becoming her most supportive bestie.

And, yes, I absolutely agree with Rosalie being Bella’s tool. Bella knew EXACTLY who to call. She could have called Carlisle and reasoned with him, explained exactly what she wanted, why she wanted it and that she was unwilling to go through anything that threatened the fetus. I’m sure, as a physician, Carlisle would have (as he did) taken her side without Rosalie’s threat. She could have called Esme, the mother of the entire family and the only one amongst them who truly understands a mother’s love, who understood her position completely. Esme, as his mother, may have been able to reason with Edward. Along with Carlisle, they could have played the heavy hand of reason. She did neither of those things. She called Rosalie because she knew exactly the position Rosalie would take. She needed someone who didn’t give a damn if she lived or died, but who would protect the fetus to the death. She counted on Rosalie not only siding with her, but truly wanting the baby for her own.

You smart alec, I didn’t mean it that way I actually do think Rosalie does wear a mask of sorts, a mask that only comes off with Emmett. I think, because Emmett was able to get under her skin in a way no one else could, Emmett knows a lot more about Rosalie’s pain and vulnerability than anyone else in the family. He is the only one she lets see it. Everyone else is aware of it, but doesn’t truly understand it, because she will not let them. So, I think he’s perfectly happy with his role in her life, and I think his personality suits him for it. He can be her dumping ground because he lets everything go and doesn’t dwell. It’s actually a perfect balancing act between them. She holds everything in because she doesn’t want anyone to know how deeply she hurts and then explodes when it gets to be too much, and he takes it all in from her and then just releases it into the universe.

Great post, Jazz Girl. Love your point about the Denali sisters. I hadn't thought of them, but they are an excellent example of content vampires without anything that could be remotely called monogamous or steadfast, lasting mate-type relationships in their lives!

corona wrote:Exactly. I don't see Rosalie as being the ally there, she is the tool that Bella uses to bring her pregnancy to full term. Rosalie isn't prepared for the actual delivery. There's that "tunnel vision" thing again. My take on the delivery isn't that Jacob kicks her out of the room, it's Stephenie. Your job is done, and you aren't worthy to stay any longer. The scene changes and becomes one of saving Bella's life, and only those who love her can stay. Rosalie returns to collect the baby, then leaves.

This is absolutely brilliant, corona, especially the last two sentences.

Jazz Girl wrote:But, Esme also loved Bella in a way that Rosalie never could or would,

A little side-tracking here. Yeah, from the very beginning, maybe even before Alice. I daresay she might possibly have had the most interesting POV there during NM, and was likely Bella's biggest supporter having already adopted her in her heart as her own child. I can only guess, but I bet she took the wrongness of abandoning Bella most keenly.

Jazz Girl wrote:because Emmett was able to get under her skin in a way no one else could,

Are you testing me? I'm not taking the bait.

Violet Sunlight wrote:The point I am making is, the parent/child-vampire-bond ALONE is NOT strong enough for them to be content with living with the ever present painful and repulsive condition as yellow-eyed vampires do.

VS, I'm not sure Rosalie has that perception of herself. I don't think so. Rosalie is the type that always blames someone else. Edward, yes, especially around Bella, considers the thirst as evidence that he is a monster. I don't really get that from Rosalie. I'm sure she doesn't like it, but I think she would blame Carlisle for creating it and humans for aggravating it.

From SM's "Miscalculation", Rosalie appears to be very self-satisfied with her beauty.

I may have made a miscalculation myself. Sometimes I don't see what is staring me in the face. I had assumed that Rosalie saw children as being her redemption. But she says "Perhaps I would have developed a better character if I'd been born with a plain face and a boring body. Perhaps I would have been happier that way. But that was impossible to prove. I had my beauty; it was something I could count on." There is no mention of children in that paragraph.

Reading that before, I had assumed the "impossible to prove" phrase meant that, now that she was a vampire, she would never know how her life would have turned out. Reading it again, I think it means Rosalie recognizes she might have developed a better character is she hadn't been so beautiful, regardless of her human or vampire states. It was always impossible to prove because she was always beautiful. She doesn't seem bitter, she looks at it as the way things are. Her beauty and her shallowness go hand in hand, that's just the way it is. She doesn't see character as being unimportant, it's just something she never needed, even when she was human.

And now for a few good things about Rose.

After Nessie, Rose appears to be more relaxed and somewhat normal, when she isn't arguing with Jacob. She actually engages in conversation without being snide. She is a little wary of handing her over to Bella at the beginning, but no more wary than anyone else, including Bella. I think Bella would tell us if she detected Rosalie being jealous or grudging when handing over Nessie, but she doesn't.

This is what I mean by deferential, JG. I know it's not definitive, it's more like the dog that didn't bark, the absence of evidence. It's weak tea, but my post-Nessie impressions were more favorable to Rosalie than Jacob, and were strongly influenced by the imprinting reveal scene. Rose's anger with Jacob does seem to contain some righteous indignation over not allowing the rightful mother to hold her own child. I could have misinterpreted that, but I was completely sympatico with Edward and Rosalie at that moment.

Bella DOES play it smart, often requesting that Nessie be handed over to Rose specifically. Bella's generosity with Rose will likely go a very long way to smoothing that path and turning aside any resentment that might creep up. That's going to be mostly on Bella's side, but Rose needs help.

"It will take an amazing amount of control,” she mused. “More even than Carlisle has. He may be just strong enough…the only thing he’s not strong enough to do is stay away from her. That’s a lost cause.”

corona, with the imprinting reveal scene, I got the impression that Rosalie was just happy to take any opportunity to get angry with Jacob, because, as she put it so succinctly, she owed him, "a good kick in the gut". It was opportunity knocks, in my opinion, rather than a sign she was favouring mother and father over imprintee.